Mini-Map 4: Burger
Creator: DocSpacebar || First Published: 03/29/2017 || Players: 2 || Size: 16x11
Categories: None
Rating: 0 in 0 ratings
For design map discussion or to get suggestions from other users, visit the AWBW Discord Chat!
Comments:
DocSpacebar (03/29/2017 02:56pm | Edited: 03/29/2017 02:56pm):
To apologize for the issues in the previous Mini-maps, I've prepared a delicious burger. Only it's not actually a
burger, but a battlefield. I sure had one job :P

The idea is to make the whole map a huge free-for-all. To that end, I put in a lot of forests. FOW would make
taking that Com Tower much more dangerous, because you never know when the other guy's sneaking in an
Artillery. There are few cities in the center, with the two cities in the middle 3 rows blocked from each other by a
river- making them a solid defensive position. Possibly. If you can beat the other guy to them. 10000 funds to a
side.

Once again, critique is welcomed.
Xmo5 (03/30/2017 10:00am):
Mirror symmetry is still hurting you here since it makes the battle sort of linear. You
don't have to avoid it because, in theory, it can be done well, but it makes things a lot
harder on the map designer when it comes to designing interesting fronts. Rotational
symmetry helps a lot in that regard.

Other than that I'll say that you should probably have more contested properties. Right
now, there are only a few cities up for grabs: The two on the right side blocked by the
pipes and the two on the left side by the river. The ones on the right are relatively
defensible, even if you start losing ground, on account of the close proximity to the base
and the pipe positioning lending nicely to defensive artillery use to prevent capture. The
only thing that makes them contestable is their close proximity to the frontline, meaning
small shifts one way or another could in theory present a capture opportunity (this is
generally part of small map dynamics). The other two cities over by the HQs are sort of
far away, so most of the battle won't be taking place there. In other words, they're
contested, but not really a focal point of the combat.

You generally want to have cities that can be taken from your opponent if you advance
forward. As you move forward, your reinforcements take longer to reach the battle while
their reinforcements arrive quickly, making it easier for them to react to immediate
needs, and therefore repel your attacks. To compensate, the attacker needs to be able to
capture properties to either boost income or power (you do have a contested tower here,
but it's not really balanced) and to give them a foothold in enemy territory. It doesn't
need to be a lot, but they need to be both realistically attainable and in a practical
position. The cities you have on the right are in practical positions, but aren't
realistically attainable, and you have the opposite problem with the cities on the left.
Again, I'll stress that this is hard to do with mirror symmetry.

Anyway, what I'm getting at is that you need targets for the players to shoot for, sort of
like stepping stones on the way to victory. They need to think "maybe if I can attack that
city, I'll have a good stronghold, allowing me to focus my efforts on the other areas a
bit more without losing ground here. If I wait them out a bit, I'll have more money
accumulating and soon I'll .... ..." etc. Remember that it doesn't always have to be
cities. Towers work well for this, but you don't want them to be very contested because
any FTA or STA could really throw the battle one way or another since 120 attack vs 100
attack will make a bigger difference than gaining an extra 1k of your opponents income
(for example, giving you an income advantage of 18k vs 16k). On small maps where funding
is lower, cities mean more, so be judicious, but don't make them all so easy to defend.

Hope that helps... sorry for the novel...
DocSpacebar (03/30/2017 11:06pm):
No, the novel's great! I probably should look back to this post in particular every time I put a new map together,
because this is solid advice.

I added a third city to the far side of the map. Considering adding more in the corners to make the area more
worthwhile, but I'm worried it'd be too many funds; I want to keep it under 12000 funds a side, because two
artillery a turn sounds like a nightmare. I also widened the movable area some to add some breathing room.

I might move the Com Towers clear to the other side of the map as well. In a small map like this, it's hard to
make them easier to defend. I also added some more cities in the center, and replaced a few cities with forests
to keep the funds lower. One thing I worry about with a small map like this is making it too easy for Recons to
blitz the other side before anyone can capture anything.

Thanks for the critique!
Xmo5 (03/31/2017 10:20am):
I like the improvements, but one thing I'll say is that it can be dangerous to have any
properties placed along the center line. It tends to exacerbate FTA issues by making it a
race to see who gets there and claims it first- once it's claimed, it's harder to retake
because it forms a nice defensive location for the current owner, all the while providing
that player with more income. In short, someone has to have the advantage, and more than
likely it comes down to map imbalances rather than player skill level. (Worth noting that
on multiplayer maps, this issue is less significant with a truly central property, because
the player who captures, say, the only tower, becomes an instant target for the other
players, which can be a disadvantage if they're unprepared)

I'd recommend splitting those 2 central cities into 2 each. The one on the right could
probably just become one to the north and one to the south of the current location. The
other city I think would look nice if you put one north and one south of the mountain just
left of its current location, just above/below the used silos. You can see how the mirror
symmetry makes this center line hard to construct; it frequently either ends up looking
awkward, having sub-par gameplay, or both, which is why a lot of people avoid it.

Oh, it's also worth mentioning: If you haven't read through it yet, I do have an
introductory guide to map design. As a heads up, the tone is geared more towards newer
users and I've already sort of covered some of the material in more detail through my
comments here, but it can never hurt to take a look anyway-

http://www.takeyourturn.net/t877-map-making-guide-i-introduction-to-awbw-map-design




Advance Wars is (c) 1990-2001 Nintendo and (c) 2001 Intelligent Systems. All images are copyright their respective owners.